1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of wastewater treatment business and other wastewater waste treatment-related business, which has Incheon Seo-gu.

B. The Plaintiff is operating a wastewater treatment business after reporting the installation of wastewater discharge facilities and the installation of malodor-emitting facilities at the place of business in Incheon Branch (hereinafter “instant place of business”).

C. On December 1, 2015, the Environment Management and employees of Incheon Metropolitan City confirmed on December 1, 2015 that the waste water generated from the malodor-emitting pipes (gas), which are located in the flow control tank (e.g., 8 square meters), and the wastewater circulation facilities (22.78 square meters), are not discharged into the water pollution prevention facilities, and the waste water generated from the malodor-emitting substance transfer pipes (hereinafter “product transfer pipes”) is not discharged through the pipes (hereinafter “instant pipes”) with the diameter of 15 meters connected to the above transfer pipes.

Article 62(2)5, Article 64(3)2, and Article 71 of the former Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystem Conservation Act (amended by Act No. 13879, Jan. 27, 2016; hereinafter “Water Quality Ecosystem Act”); Article 105(1)22, and Article 64(3) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystem Conservation Act (amended by Ordinance of Ministry of Environment No. 629, Dec. 22, 2015; hereinafter “Enforcement Rule of the Act”) provides that “the suspension of business may be carried out within a prescribed period of not more than six months” to the Plaintiff on January 4, 2016. However, according to Articles 105(1) and 22(g) of the Enforcement Rule of the Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystem Act, the Defendant may revoke the registration of the business at the time of the said violation.

However, if Article 64(2) and (3) are interpreted systematically and comprehensively, the violation to which the criteria for revocation is applied in the event of the second violation is about Article 64(2) of the Act.